Lieblong v. Pfizer Corporation
Plaintiff: Dalton Lieblong
Defendant: Pfizer Corporation
Case Number: 4:2008cv00166
Filed: February 25, 2008
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas
Office: Little Rock Office
County: Pulaski
Presiding Judge: James M. Moody
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 29 U.S.C. ยง 621 Job Discrimination (Age)
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
January 8, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 32 ORDER DISMISSING CASE with prejudice pursuant to settlement by the parties. Signed by Judge Brian S. Miller on 1/8/09. (bkp)
October 24, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 26 JOINT STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING CONFIDENTIALITY. Signed by Judge Brian S. Miller on 10/24/08. (bkp)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Arkansas Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Lieblong v. Pfizer Corporation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Dalton Lieblong
Represented By: Cathleen V. Compton
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Pfizer Corporation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?